Canada to phase out fossil fuel subsidies?

I seem to be fixating on the upcoming Canadian election at the moment. I don't mean to do so, although it is a particularly important one in terms of the way the country goes forward. What I am trying to do is to look at election issues as a segue into a discussion of some other important issues of the day.
I have been generally underwhelmed by the NDP's campaign thus far. They seem to have strayed far from their left-wing traditions, towards the crowded political centre, and in the process they have bought into Conservative-style popularism (and sometimes even into Conservative-style policies). But they have at least been willing to bring up the issue of government subsidies for the fossil fuel industry (as has the Liberal party, and of course the Greens).
The NDP has vowed unequivocally to end subsidies to the fossil fuel industry, and to put the money saved into clean energy. The Liberals have also pledged to phase them out, over an undisclosed period. Of course, the Green Party would end them immediately and do much more besides. Technically, even the Conservatives are committed to phasing our fossil fuel subsidies, after they grudgingly signed on to a G20 pledge back in 2009, but don't hold your breath on that.
I'm sure that most Canadians are not even aware that such subsidies exist. They assume that the high price of gas at the pump, and of electricity at the meter, is in fact the full price. Not so. A 2013 report by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) identifies over $34 billion each year that is spent (or foregone) by the Canadian government in direct support to fossil fuel producers and in uncollected tax on externalized costs such as traffic accidents, carbon emissions, air pollution and road congestion. Worldwide, this figure is around $2 trillion! Indeed, Canada provides more subsidies to petroleum as a proportion of government revenue than any developed nation on Earth besides the United States and (oddly) Luxembourg.
Most of this subsidy is in the form of uncollected taxes on the externalized costs of burning transportation fuels like gasoline and diesel, as well as direct producer support to oil companies through a variety of provincial and federal incentives to encourage fossil fuel extraction. Smaller, but still very significant, amounts come in un-priced carbon emissions from burning natural gas, and un-priced carbon and sulfur dioxide emissions from the coal industry. In total, this $34 billion represents something like 4% of Canadian government revenues though taxation, or around $1,000 per Canadian citizen per year.
The opportunity cost of this huge amount of money is stark, when one considers Canada's desperate need for investment in public transportation and other infrastructure projects, and our failing support for green energy development in, for example, solar and wind generation capacity (which has been shown to provide more than seven times the employment from an equivalent investment in oil and gas extraction).
Canada currently enjoys some of the cheapest gas in the developed world, and the IMF itself estimates that we are undervaluing the true cost of gasoline by about $0.30 per litre. While gas prices remain artificially low, people will choose to buy cars rather than take public transit, with concomitant repercussions on our road infrastructure, transportation accidents and greenhouse gas emissions. If we had to pay the real price of the energy we consume, our consumption patterns would be quite different (this is the theory behind carbon taxes). It would also change perceptions of the comparative costs of renewable technologies, and the costs of investment in energy conservation measures.
None of the parties have expanded in any clear way exactly what they are proposing for fossil fuel subsidies as far as I am aware, and any plans to end fossil fuel subsidies remains suspiciously vague and unfocussed. Thomas Mulcair has publicly mentioned a figure of $1 billion a year, which is close to the annual figure for direct incentives to encourage fossil fuel extraction, so I am pretty sure they are not thinking of factoring in externalized costs like traffic accidents, air pollution and road congestion, and probably not even carbon emissions. But the fact that they are even talking about the billions of dollars of subsidies that have been sunk into oil, gas and coal over the years is worthy of some credit.
If we could also get back the billions of dollars of subsidies to the nuclear industry that are hidden in our electricity costs, that would be an added bonus! State-owned Atomic Energy of Canada Limited has received well over $21 billion in direct government subsidies since its inception in 1952. No-one knows the extent of the environmental and health costs, and the associated costs of accidents, cleanups, waste disposal, subsidized insurance, plant decommissioning, etc.
Imagine if these billions had been put into renewable energy research and development over the last several decades: we would probably not be having this discussion right now.